8 * • 









v- 



^ 




^ - 









^ 



■'^ ,^ 




.0' N 






,-v 



'Kr*? 


















#> 



■V /J 



\ v 



• ^. -^ x " ^ V 



^ 



</> ,\X 



">-, 









%** 



V ^ 



' ^ 



p>* 



-7 ^ 



*° °« 






& ^ 






»:> 



^ 









x 






5 









,V 



:W% 













A^> '<£, 













■ 



























■"'>. 












Sb 


















,N %(.. 




































































































































































<- 














"^v 



































LEGAL AND HISTORICAL PROOF 

of the 

RESURRECTION OF 
THE DEAD 



LEGAL AND HISTORICAL 
PROOF 

of the 

RESURRECTION OF 
THE DEAD 

With an Examination of the 

Evidence in the New Testament 



By 

JOHN F. WHITWORTH 

Author of "Taxation of Corporations,'' ' "Statutory Lanv 

of Corporations, ' ' ' 'Creation of Corporations ^ ' y 

ii Corporate Opinions,'''' etc. 



Harrisburg, Pa. 

Publishing House of the United Evangelical Church 

1912 



Copyright 1912 

Pub. House of the United Evangelical Churgh 

Harrisburg, Pa. 



©CLA330414 



u , 



This pamphlet is affectionately dedicated to 

HENRIETTA AND JOHN FORD 

by 

Iheir Father 

JOHN F. WH1TW0RTH 



PREFACE 

Civilization would make little prog- 
ress if each succeeding age, disregard- 
ing all that had already been accom- 
plished, should attempt to establish for 
itself first and fundamental principles 
in the various branches of learning. 
These must, generally, be accepted by 
the ordinary student as established, 
and here education begins. 

In my view it is not necessary, nor 
even desirable, to go into an inquiry as 
to the authenticity of the Holy Scrip- 
tures, nor whether these writings are 
evidence of the facts therein set forth. 
We have a right to assume that these 
questions have already been settled 
upon sound principles, and should 
begin our religious instruction by as- 
suming as axiomatic the authority of 
these holy writings. Moreover, faith, 
the result of training and heredity, is 
our best assurance. This discussion is 
5 



6 Preface 

intended, therefore, only as supple- 
mental to faith and not in any way to 
take its place. 

The question "If a man die shall he 
live again/' has been repeated by man- 
kind through all the ages since the time 
of Job. Many centuries ago the sages 
of Greece and Kome soon discovered 
that as none of the properties of matter 
would apply to the operations of the 
mind, the human soul must consequent- 
ly be an existence distinct from the 
body, pure, simple and spiritual, inca- 
pable of dissolution and susceptible of 
a much higher degree of virtue and hap- 
piness after the release from its cor- 
poral prison. 1 Gibbon, 528. Philoso- 
phers and scientists, from the earliest 
period even to the present time, through 
research and reason and without the 
aid of Divine Revelation, have attempt- 
ed an answer to the question. Whether 
the soul shall survive the destruction of 
the body, is a matter of as much con- 
cern now as on the day Job asked the 
question. A few of the arguments from 



Preface 7 

a scientific point of view, briefly stated, 
in favor of the continued existence of 
the soul, show how far they fall short 
in satisfying the ordinary inquirer; 
they also reconcile him the more to a 
simple trust in Divine Kevelation. 



CONTENTS 

I. Arguments of Philosophers and 

Scientists, 11 

II. Legal Proof, 19 

III. Historical Proof, 35 

IV. An Examination of the Evidence 

in the New Testament, 39 



I. 

Arguments of Philosophers and 
Scientists. 

Bishop Butler, reasoning from anal- 
ogy and the course of nature, assumes 
what he considers a self-evident fact by 
saying, "We know we are endowed with 
capacities of action, of happiness and 
misery ; for we are conscious of acting, 
of enjoying pleasure and suffering 
pain." Thence he proceeds to argue, 
"Now that we have these powers and 
capacities before death is a presump- 
tion that we shall retain them through 
and after death, unless there be some 
positive reason to think that death is 
the destruction of these living powers." 
His argument amounts to this: That 
if men were assured that death was not 
the destruction of the soul, they would 
have no reason to think that any other 
power would destroy the soul just at 
the instant of the death of the body; 
11 



12 Legal and Historical Proof 

that the assumption that the destruc- 
tion of the body by death results also 
in the destruction of the soul, must be 
upon the supposition that the soul has 
no existence independent of the body 
and that they are interdependent. He 
then proceeds to show that the soul has 
an independent existence; that the 
body is simply the organ or medium 
through which the soul manifests itself y 
and that no inference can be drawn 
from the destruction of the body that 
the soul is in the least affected. He il- 
lustrates: The eye is not itself per- 
cipient, that is, it itself cannot see, but 
is simply the organ through which the 
soul looks out and perceives material 
things. When that organ is impaired 
by age, glasses are used to aid the de- 
fect. The eye is used as an instrument 
of sight in the same sense as are spec- 
tacles. He illustrates with other por- 
tions of the body : A limb is amputa- 
ted, still the soul has the power of di- 
recting motion by will and choice, so 
that it would still be capable of moving 
if it had an artificial limb with which 



Besurrection of the Dead 13 

to move; and so, all tlie limbs might be 
amputated and the soul would have the 
same power. It remains intact, unaf- 
fected by the mutilations of the body. 
He still enlarges upon his illustrations 
and shows that while the body pre- 
serves its form, the component parts 
are continually changing. The body 
one now has is not the same body he 
had seven, fourteen or twenty-one years 
ago; yet through all these changes of 
the body the soul is unaffected and re- 
mains the same, for he recollects occur- 
rences through all these changes and 
knows he is the same person. If, there- 
fore, he argues, the body may be de- 
stroyed in part, as by amputation of 
the limbs, or entirely, as by the grad- 
ual changing of the component parts of 
the body, without in the least affecting 
the soul, there is no reason for believ- 
ing that the soul is in any way affected 
when the body is at once destroyed by 
death. "Butler's Analogy," "Grilmore's 
Evidences," "Paley's Evidence s," 
"Thompson's Life, Death and Immor- 
tality" (Everybody's Magazine, 1911). 



14 Legal and Historical Proof 

Sir Oliver Lodge proceeds along 
somewhat different lines. He shows 
that matter, anything material, is 
never destroyed. It may change form, 
but the parts remain. A tree, in the 
form of a tree, a man, in the form of a 
man, are certainly mortal. They decay 
and vanish from view ; but the particles 
of which they are composed remain 
after the tree and the man have disap- 
peared. Only the groupings of matter 
are destructible; the matter itself re- 
mains. So as to the larger of creations. 
The stars and planets have their pe- 
riods of birth and death. The matter 
of which they were created existed be- 
fore their creation into planets, and 
will continue to exist, in a different 
form, when the planets cease to exist, 
Then, by various arguments, he shows 
that the soul is superior to the body 
and controls the movements of the 
body ; that it is superior to all forms of 
matter. It may even create matter in 
the same sense that the world was cre- 
ated; it takes the raw material of the 
mountains and fashions it into a rail- 



Kesurrection of the Dead 15 

road locomotive or a great warship. 
It may even control and guide the 
forces of nature ; it seizes the electrical 
forces and directs them into channels 
of commerce. It is true the soul can- 
not be seen nor its influence felt except 
as it manifests itself through the ac- 
tion of the body or impresses itself on 
matter and material things; but it is 
something real, a personality with in- 
tellect, emotion, consciousness and 
will; and its existence is as certain as 
that of the material world. Then, he 
argues, if matter is indestructible, so is 
the soul which is superior to matter. 
What he declares is no less than this : 
That whereas it is certain that the 
present body cannot long exist without 
the soul, it is quite possible and indeed 
necessary for the soul to exist without 
the present body. This is based on the 
soul's manifest transcendence, on its 
genuine reality, and on the general law 
of the persistence of all real existence. 
He extends the doctrine of evolution, 
as declared by Darwin, to the soul and 
contends that the soul will certainly 



16 Legal and Historical Proof 

develop and increase in capacity 
throughout eternity. He very eloquent- 
ly says : "Whatever evil days may fall 
upon an individual or a nation, or even 
sometimes on a whole planet, yet the 
material is subordinate to the spirit- 
ual; and if the spiritual persists, it 
cannot be stationary. It must surely 
rise in the scale of existence." "Science 
and Immortality." 

Louis Elbe, like Sir Oliver Lodge, 
contends for the indestructibility of 
matter; and, in addition, places much 
emphasis on the permanency of the 
Ether of Space. He believes that all 
matter will be finally resolved into 
ether, which will be the only really 
abiding substance. He argues that 
every act and thought of man are im- 
pressed upon ether like the printers 
type is impressed upon paper; that it 
contains a complete record of every 
thought and act from the beginning of 
time ; that the universe itself is indeed 
the book from which all men are judged 
at the last day ; that it is the incorrup- 
tible witness which bears somewhere 



Kesurrection of the Dead 17 

in its immensity the ever present and 
ineffaceable mark of our brief passage 
through material life, and that God 
thus embraces all things at a single 
glance and perceives them as if He 
were present. Thence, he argues, if 
even the thought is thus everlastingly 
preserved, even so must the soul which 
is the author of the thought, be pre- 
served. He also shows that a belief in 
some form in the immortality of the 
soul has been held by mankind, savage 
and civilized, from time immemorial. 
It appears from monuments built by 
primitive races long since lost to mem- 
ory, and in the laws and customs of 
ancient peoples who have contributed 
to the civilization of the human species, 
and this belief is the whole teaching of 
ancient wisdom. From this universal 
desire or belief, he draws an argument 
in favor of the immortality of the 
soul. "Future Life in the Light of An- 
cient Wisdom and Modern Science." 

It would seem that all such efforts 
extend no further than feebly to point 
out the desire, the hope, or at most, the 



18 Legal and Historical Proof 

probability of a future state. Even 
Socrates, tlie Grecian philosopher, 
could not satisfy himself by consider- 
ing the subject in the dim light of rea- 
son, and could well say that he could 
get no further light until God should 
send a messenger from heaven. The 
question addressed to Job is still perti- 
nent: "Canst thou by searching find 
out God? Canst thou find out the Al- 
mighty unto perfection?" Mankind 
stood, therefore, in need of a revelation, 
and even under the Christian Eevela- 
tion, as Dr. Paley remarks, "there does 
not seem to be too much light nor any 
degree of assurance which is superflu- 
ous" 



II. 

Legal Proof. 

It ought to be said concerning the ex- 
pression, "the resurrection of the 
dead/' that it is here used in this sense : 
That, notwithstanding the death of the 
body, the soul shall persist in its exist- 
ence, and so is used synonymously with 
the expression, "the immortality of the 
soul." It will be conceded that the sa- 
cred writings declare in unmistakable 
terms the doctrine of the resurrection 
of the dead, and the believer contends 
that these writings are competent and 
prima facie evidence in proof of the 
fact. If so, he may rest upon this proof, 
and the burden to show it otherwise is 
upon the objector. It is not necessary 
nor desirable, however, to shift this 
burden upon the unbeliever since it is 
not difficult to establish all that is 
claimed for these books. Are these 
writings, especially the New Testa- 
19 



20 Legal and Historical Proof 

ment, legal and competent evidence in 
proof of the resurrection of tlie dead? 
This depends upon the determination 
of the question whether such writings 
are within the rules of law governing 
the admissibility of ancient records and 
copies thereof. What, then, are these 
rules, and are these writings such rec- 
ords as come within the rules? 

In a court of law the execution of a 
written instrument, the signing and de- 
livery, must first be proven before the 
instrument will be admitted in evi- 
dence, unless some rule of court dis- 
penses with the proof, or the execution 
is admitted by the opposite party to 
the suit. But this rule is not applied 
to ancient documents. Such docu- 
ments are said to prove themselves. 
They must, however, be free from just 
grounds of suspicion and must come 
from the proper custody. Being free 
in this respect and coming from such 
a place, the law presumes that they 
were fairly and honestly obtained and 
preserved for use. The proper custody 
is the place where such papers might 



Besurrection of the Dead 21 

naturally and reasonably be expected 
to be found; and it is this custody 
which gives authenticity to the docu- 
ment. 1 Greenleaf Evidence, Sections 
142, 570. This rule has been illustra- 
ted both in England and America in 
many cases involving the rights of 
property, in which it was held, in a 
question of title to property, that an 
ancient document comes from the prop- 
er custody when it is produced by one 
having an interest in the property. On 
this principle an old chartulary of the 
dissolved Abbey of Glastonbury was 
held to be admissible because found in 
the possession of the owner of part of 
the abbey lands, though not of the prin- 
cipal proportion. Bullen vs. Mitchell, 
2 Price, 413 (3 Bingham K C, 201). 
In a case touching the right of presen- 
tation to a living, as it is called in 
England, proof depended upon docu- 
ments several hundred years old, found 
in the possession of the family of whom 
the claimant was a member. Chief Jus- 
tice Tindal, in disposing of the case, re- 
marked : "These documents were found 



22 Legal and Historical Proof 

in a place in which, and under the care 
of persons with whom, they might nat- 
urally and reasonably be expected to 
be found ; and that is precisely the cus- 
tody which gives authenticity to docu- 
ments found within it." Lord Bishop, 
of Meath vs. Marquis of Winchester, 3 
Bingham 1ST. C, 200. On the other hand, 
old grants to abbeys and other ancient 
grants have been rejected as evidence 
of private property rights where their 
possession has appeared altogether un- 
connected with persons who had any 
interest in the estate. 3 Bingham N. 
G, 201. And so a manuscript found in 
the Herald's office enumerating the pos- 
sessions of the dissolved Monastery of 
Tutburg; Liggon vs. Strutt, 2 Anstr., 
601; a manuscript found in the Bod- 
leian Library, Oxford; Mitchell vs. 
Eabitts, 3 Taunt., 91 ; an old grant to a 
priory brought from the Cottonian 
Mss., in the British Museum ; Swinner- 
ton vs. Marquis of Stafford, 3 Taunt., 
91 (3 Bingham K C, 201) were held to 
be inadmissible in evidence, the posses- 
sion of the documents being unconnect- 



Eesurrection of the Dead 23 

ed with the interests in the property. 
From the reason of the rule and the 
necessities of the case, the more ancient 
the document the stronger the pre- 
sumption of the law. Documents thir- 
ty years old are held in Pennsylvania 
to be ancient documents, and to such in- 
struments the courts of this state have 
repeatedly applied the rule. It has 
been repeatedly held in Pennsylvania 
that ancient documents, documents 
which have the appearance of due an- 
tiquity and genuineness and which are 
produced from the proper custody, are 
admissible in evidence without proof 
of their execution. Lewis vs. Lewis, 4 
W. & S., 378; McKeynolds vs. Longen- 
berger, 57 Pa., 13 ; Morris vs. Vanderen, 
1 Dallas, 64; Eodgers vs. Eiddelsburg 
Coal Co., 31 L. J., 325 ; but where there 
is anything on the face of the docu- 
ments to raise suspicion as to their 
genuineness, they should not be admit- 
ted in evidence without further proof 
of their genuineness. Lau vs. Mumma, 
43 Pa., 267; York Trust Co. vs. Kindig, 
7 York, 149. The Executive Depart- 



24 Legal and Historical Proof 

ment at Harrisburg holds in its cus- 
tody a parchment which purports to be 
the original grant from Charles the 
Second to William Penn for territory 
in North America called Pennsylvania. 
It is dated 1682, bears the coat of arms 
of the king, commences with the words 
"Charles the Second, by the grace of 
God, King of England, Scotland, 
France and Ireland," states the consid- 
eration for the grant as being, among 
other things, "two beaver skins to be 
delivered at our said Castle of Wind- 
sor on the first day of January in every 
year," and closes with the words "Wit- 
ness ourself at Westminster, the fourth 
day of March, in the three and thirtieth 
year of our reign. By writ of privy 
seal. Pigott." This document has the 
appearance of due antiquity; there is 
nothing on the face of the document to 
raise a suspicion as to its genuineness, 
and it is found in the custody where it 
is natural and reasonable to expect 
that it should be found. If it were a 
pertinent subject of inquiry in any of 
our courts, the law would presume it 



Besurrection of the Dead 25 

to be genuine, and it would be admitted 
in evidence upon simple proof that it 
came from the custody of the Executive 
Department. The rule in Pennsylvania 
is in accord with the general rule of 
law expressed by an eminent legal 
writer in these words: "Every docu- 
ment, apparently ancient, coming from 
the proper repository or custody, and 
bearing on its face no evident marks of 
forgery, the law presumes to be genu- 
ine, and devolves on the opposing party 
the burden of proving it to be other- 
wise." "Greenleaf's Testimony of the 
Evangelists." The presumption is 
founded upon the uniform and imme- 
morial experience that such a docu- 
ment found in such a place is genuine, 
And this leads to the consideration 
of another and equally important prin- 
ciple : The law presumes to be genuine 
copies of ancient documents which 
were of public and general interest. 
But in order to warrant such a pre- 
sumption the documents must be of a 
public nature, the copies thereof acted 
upon or assented to by the public, all 



26 Legal and Historical Proof 

having an opportunity of knowing 
their contents. It is a rule founded 
upon the same principle as that which 
permits evidence to be given of the gen- 
eral reputation of an individual ; and is 
an exception to the general rule of law 
that hearsay evidence is inadmissible. 
This rule has been applied in England 
in cases involving adverse claims to a 
peerage, and in England and America 
in cases where title to lands was in 
question. In considering the admissi- 
bility of a copy of an ancient document, 
Chief Justice Kenyon stated the rule in 
these words : "Evidence of reputation 
upon general points is receivable be- 
cause all mankind being interested 
therein, it is natural to suppose that 
they may be conversant with the ob- 
jects, and that they should discourse 
together about them, having all the 
same means of information." More- 
wood vs. Wood, 14 East's Repts., 327. 
And so in a claim of peerage, where 
there was no patent of creation or en- 
rollment of such patent, and the Con- 
temporaneous Lords' Journals were 



Eesurrection of the Dead 27 

not in existence, an old manuscript 
book, purporting to be copied from the 
journals by an officer whose duty it was 
to prepare lists of peers present and 
absent, was received as evidence of a 
peer's sitting in Parliament. Slane's 
Peerage, 5 Clark & F., 23. It was on 
this principle that a list of first pur- 
chasers, under William Penn, found in 
the office of the Surveyor General of 
Pennsylvania, was admitted in evi- 
dence in an action of ejectment to prove 
the execution and delivery of a deed 
which had been lost. Hurst vs. Dippo, 
1 Dallas, 19; Morris vs. Yanderen, 1 
Dallas, 64; and upon the same princi- 
ple a list of the first grantees from the 
Proprietaries, found in the office of the 
Surveyor General, made from ancient 
papers lost or destroyed, was received 
in evidence in ejectment. Kingston vs. 
Tesby, 10 S. & E., 386. In his opinion, 
Chief Justice Tilghman says: "The 
book which contains the list in question 
is among the public books preserved in 
the Land Office, and the list itself, it 
must be presumed, was made out from 



28 Legal and Historical Proof 

ancient papers, many of which, may 
now be lost, or, perhaps, not in exist- 
ence. It may be presumed too that it 
was made out as a matter of public con- 
venience, and not with a view of pri- 
vate disputes. Under such circum- 
stances, it ought to be evidence." 
Where, therefore, the subject of inquiry 
is as to a. copy of an ancient document 
of public interest, and the faithfulness 
of the copy is known and proclaimed 
or assented to by the public, the law 
presumes it to be a genuine copy. Re- 
liance as to its genuineness is placed, 
not on the assertion of a single indivi- 
dual, but upon the concurrent opinion 
and assent of indefinite numbers of 
persons interested in the matter. 
Starkie on Evidence (10 Ed.) pages 46- 
49 ; and where such a document is lost 
and a copy thereof is used and acted 
upon by indefinite numbers of persons, 
this is an assertion as to its genuine- 
ness and is called the prevailing cur- 
rent of assertion as to the faithfulness 
of the copy, and this assertion is re- 
sorted to as evidence. 



Kesurrection of the Dead 29 

These legal principles are of easy ap- 
plication to the books of the New Testa- 
ment. If the original writings could be 
produced from the custody of the 
Church, they would be competent evi- 
dence of their contents, for that is the 
place in which it is natural to expect 
that these ancient documents should 
be found; and copies of the originals 
are, upon the principles heretofore 
stated, also evidence, for they have 
been used, acted upon and considered 
by indefinite numbers as genuine copies 
of the originals. These ancient writ- 
ings were of public and general inter- 
est with which the public were familiar, 
and purported to relate to matters af- 
fecting both the temporal and spiritual 
welfare of the human race. It is nat- 
ural to suppose that writings of such 
importance should be widely distrib- 
uted and innumerable copies made for 
use in public worship. Conditions 
seemed to be ripe for their dissemina- 
tion, and circumstances seemed to con- 
spire to facilitate the spread of the Gos- 
pel throughout the Koman Empire. 



30 Legal and Historical Proof 

That great empire had acquired, by 
the early part of the first century, the 
fairest portions of the continent of Eu- 
rope, and extended her dominion over 
provinces in Asia and Africa. The con- 
quests of the Eoman legions prepared 
for and facilitated the more enduring 
and important conquests of Christian- 
ity. The accidents of war and com- 
merce contributed to the diffusion of 
a knowledge of the Gospel. The public 
highways, constructed for the use of 
the Koman armies, opened an easy pas- 
sage for the Christian missionaries 
from Damascus to Corinth, and from 
Italy to the extremity of Spain. At 
an early day the faith of Christ had 
been preached in every province and 
all the great cities of the empire; and 
prosperous churches had been estab- 
lished in Europe, Asia and Africa and 
the islands of the sea. The Gospel was 
accepted by great numbers of persons 
of every rank, and a pure and humble 
religion grew up in silence and finally 
erected the triumphant banner of the 
Cross on the ruins of the capital of the 



Eesurrection of the Dead 31 

empire. 1 Gibbon, 32, 504, 532, 575. 
This world-wide interest was based 
upon the teachings, life, death, resur- 
rection and ascension of Christ as re- 
corded in the books of the New Testa- 
ment and upon the ministry of His 
apostles and disciples. Copies of these 
books had, before the close of the first 
century, been multiplied in great num- 
bers throughout the empire, and been 
preserved and used for public use in 
every Christian church. 2 Gibbon, 68. 
Although the four books of the New 
Testament were originally written in 
Greek, they were soon translated into 
the languages of the various countries 
in which they were used. Accordingly, 
as early as the second century, eminent 
Christian writers are appealing from 
the authority of Latin and other ver- 
sions to the Greek, which, even at that 
time, was called ancient. One author, 
writing in the year 300, testifies that 
"the writings of the Apostles had ob- 
tained such an esteem as to be trans- 
lated into every language, both Greek 
and barbarian, and to be diligently 



32 Legal and Historical Proof 

studied by all nations." There are still 
extant Latin and Syriac translations 
made in the second century, the latter 
now in the British Museum, and the 
Egyptian translation made in the third 
century. Paley's Evidences, 143-148. 
In addition, there are the three Greek 
manuscripts, the Vatican Manuscript 
in the Vatican at Kome, and the Sinai- 
tic Manuscript at St. Petersburg, found 
in a monastery at St. Katharine on 
Mount Sinai, both copied in the fourth 
century, and the Alexandrian Manu- 
script, in the British Museum, found in 
an Egyptian monastery, copied in the 
fifth century. These and innumerable 
other copies, although made in remote 
and different countries which at the 
time had little or no communication, 
differ very little from each other or 
from the ones now in use, and in noth- 
ing that is important. Paley's Evi- 
dences, 148; Tischendorfs Introduc- 
tion ; 1 Home's Introduction, 222. 

These and successive copies, even to 
the present, have been accepted and 
acted upon as true and authentic copies, 



Eesurrection of the Dead 33 

and in the faith of their integrity mul- 
titudes in every age have entered with 
confidence the shadows of death. The 
prevailing current of assertion of the 
entire Christian world for 1900 years 
has gone to the integrity and authen- 
ticity of these copies. Considering, 
therefore, that the originals were an- 
cient writings in the custody of the 
Church; that they were of public and 
general interest ; that the manuscripts, 
purporting to be copies of these orig- 
inals, are of great antiquity; that they 
were found in the possession of the 
Church, presumably copied by those 
upon whom this duty would naturally 
devolve ; that they were of a public na- 
ture, their contents known to the pub- 
lic and assented to ; that they have been 
believed in and acted upon throughout 
the centuries; these ancient manu- 
scripts and copies thereof, are, accord- 
ing to a strict application of the legal 
rules heretofore stated, competent and 
legal evidence in proof of the facts and 
declarations which they contain. Mr. 
Greenleaf has summed up the whole 



34 Legal and Historical Proof 

matter in a short note to the text, 
wherein he discusses the legal rule in 
his Work on Evidence, in these words : 
"The rule stated in the text is one of 
the grounds on which we insist on the 
genuineness of the books of the Holy 
Scriptures ; they are found in the prop- 
er custody or place where alone they 
ought to be looked for, — namely, the 
churches, where they have been kept 
from time immemorial. They have 
been constantly referred to as the 
foundation of faith by all t^ie opposing 
sects, whose existence God, in His wis- 
dom, has seen fit to permit; whose jeal- 
ous vigilance would readily detect any 
attempt to falsify the text, and whose 
diversity of creeds would render any 
mutual combination morally impossi- 
ble. The burden of proof is, therefore, 
on the objector to impeach the genuine- 
ness of these books ; not on the Chris- 
tian to establish it." 1 Greenleaf Evi- 
dence, Section 142, note. 



III. 

Historical Proof. 

These presumptions of the law are 
sufficient without more ; but it is inter- 
esting and assuring to note how they 
are confirmed by known facts. This 
question is, in effect, no other than 
this : Is the New Testament, as now in 
use, the same as originally written? 
The historical books of the New Testa- 
ment are quoted or alluded to by a 
series of Christian writers, beginning 
with those who were contemporary 
with the Apostles, or who immediately 
followed them, and proceeding in 
close and regular succession from their 
time to the present. Paley's Evidences, 
102. They are quoted or mentioned by 
the following writers: By Barnabas, 
the companion of Paul, in an epistle 
read amongst early Christians, though 
not accounted a part of the New Testa- 
ment; by Clement, Bishop of Home, 
35 



36 Legal and Historical Proof 

named by Paul in one of his epistles; 
by Hermas, mentioned by Paul in his 
Epistles to the Eomans; by Ignatius, 
Bishop of Antioch, shortly after the 
death of Christ ; by Polycarp, who had 
conversed with the Apostles; by Pa- 
pias, an acquaintance of John the 
Apostle ; somewhat later, the year 140, 
by Justin Martyrs; the year 170 by 
Irengeus, who had conversed with the 
immediate disciples of the Apostles ; a 
little later, the year 180, by Clement of 
Alexandria, one of the most volumi- 
nous of ancient Christian writers; by 
Tertullian, who wrote about the year 
200; by Origen, who wrote about the 
year 250, and who, in the quantity of 
his writings, exceeded the most labor- 
ious of the Creek and Latin authors, 
and by Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, 
who, about the year 315, wrote a his- 
tory of the affairs of Christianity from 
its origin to his own time. Paley's Evi- 
dences, 104-129; 1 Gibbon, 534; 1 
Home's Introduction, 38-46. After this 
period, says Dr. Paley, "there is no 
room for any question upon the sub- 



Kesurrection of the Dead 37 

ject; tlie works of Christian writers be- 
ing as full of texts of Scripture, and of 
references to Scripture, as the dis- 
courses of modern divines." Paley's 
Evidences, 129. These ancient writers, 
whose works are now accessible, quote 
passages liberally from the books of 
the New Testament, and mention the 
authors by name. The force of this con- 
curring testimony as to the contents of 
the gospels, is greatly strengthened 
when it is remembered that the writers 
lived in countries remote from one an- 
other : Clement lived at Eome, Ignatius 
at Antioch, Polycarp at Smyrna, Jus- 
tin Martyrs in Syria, and Irenaeus in 
France. An examination of these quo- 
tations, as set forth in Paley's Evi- 
dences, shows clearly that the New 
Testament, as now in use, is the same 
as when originally written. There is 
also the testimony of those who wrote 
against Christianity. Tacitus, seventy 
years after the death of Christ, records 
His death as having taken place in the 
reign of Tiberius, under Procurator 
Pontius Pilate; Celsus, an Epicurean 



38 Legal and Historical Proof 

philosopher, writing in the second cen- 
tury; Porphyry, writing in the third 
century, and the Emperor Julian, writ- 
ing in the fourth century, name the 
books of the New Testament, quote lib- 
erally from them, and concede that 
they are genuine productions. Paley's 
Evidences, 30, 161-166. Celsus, espe- 
cially, takes notice of every important 
event in the life of Christ from His 
birth to His ascension, as narrated in 
the Gospels. Grilmore's Evidences, 180. 
"This sort of evidence," Dr. Paley has 
remarked, "is of all others the most un- 
questionable, the least liable to any 
practices of fraud and is not diminish- 
ed by the lapse of ages." 



IV. 

An Examination of the Evidence in 
the New Testament. 

While these books are entirely com- 
petent as evidence of the matters there- 
in related, the degree of credit to be 
given them depends, to a certain ex- 
tent, on the integrity, intelligence and 
powers of observation of the writers 
and their ability to accurately narrate 
the facts. A brief history of the wri- 
ters shows their peculiar and eminent 
qualifications for the work to be done, 
and justifies their selection. 

Matthew, called also Levi, was a na- 
tive of Galilee. Before his conversion 
he was engaged "at the receipt of cus- 
toms" under the Eoman Empire, col- 
lecting the customs or tariff on all 
goods exported or imported at Caper- 
naum on the Sea of Galilee. While 
thus engaged, he was called by Christ 
to be an Apostle. He wrote first of all 
39 



40 Legal and Historical Proof 

the Apostles, the time being about the 
year 38, and was an eye-witness of the 
principal events which he narrates. 
The occupation of Matthew as a cus- 
toms officer doubtless brought him in 
contact with men of affairs, and train- 
ed him in the detection of fraud and 
deception often resorted to, especially 
by the Greek merchants, to evade the 
payment of customs ; he would also be- 
come exceedingly suspicious and dis- 
trustful, habitually looking for fraud 
and imposition. Accordingly, he is the 
only one of the Apostles who records 
the incident of the placing of the guard 
at the sepulchre at the instance of the 
Jews, to prevent > as they alleged, the 
disciples from stealing the body of 
Christ, and the bribery of the soldiers 
by the chief priests to circulate the 
falsehood that the disciples came by 
night and stole His body while they 
slept; and he alone mentions the de- 
mand on Christ and Peter for tribute 
money when they landed at Caper- 
naum, the old home of Matthew, and 
payment with money taken from the 



Resurrection of the Dead 41 

mouth of the fish caught in the sea by 
Peter. Since he himself had collected 
such duties, he would more likely men- 
tion the incident than any of the other 
Apostles. His habit of suspecting 
fraud and imposition would naturally 
lead him to closely observe and investi- 
gate the miracles of Christ; and his 
faith and confidence in them are a guar- 
antee of their genuine reality. 

Mark was not an Apostle, but said to 
be one of the seventy disciples. He was 
the son of Mary, the sister of Barnabas, 
a pious woman of Jerusalem, at whose 
house the Apostles frequently assem- 
bled. He traveled at different times 
with Paul, Barnabas and Peter, and 
doubtless received much benefit and in- 
formation from these associations. He 
wrote his Gospel about the year 60 in 
the city of Rome. While he himself, 
probably, did not have personal knowl- 
edge of the matters of which he wrote, 
he was doubtless thoroughly informed 
by Peter, who was an eye-witness, and 
who is supposed to have dictated the 
Gospel to Mark. The agency of Peter 



42 Legal and Historical Proof 

in Mark's narrative is asserted by all 
ancient writers, and appears, as re- 
marked by Mr. Greenleaf, from the 
fact, among others, that "scarcely any 
transaction of Jesus is related at 
which Peter was not present." The 
Gospel by Mark is, therefore, regarded 
as the equivalent of a narrative writ- 
ten by one who saw the incidents re- 
corded. 

Since Peter was an important factor 
in this narrative, these observations 
would be incomplete without some ref- 
erence to his character and qualifica- 
tions. Peter was outspoken and hon- 
est ; he made no attempt to conceal his 
ignorance ; and if there were any ques- 
tions to be asked of Christ, Peter was 
usually the one to make the inquiry. 
Through this habit he acquired much 
valuable information. His powers of 
discernment apparently exceeded those 
of any of the other Apostles. He was 
the only one that seemed able to an- 
swer the question : "But whom say ye 
that I am?" Peter answered imme- 
diately : "Thou art the Christ, the Son 



Kesurrection of the Dead 43 

of the living God." Christ rated Peter 
highly, and had him with Him on sev- 
eral special and important occasions; 
he was one of three with Christ at the 
Transfiguration, and one of three at 
Gethsemane. He was brave even to 
rashness, as shown by his attempt to 
walk on the water; his attack with a 
sword on the servant of the high priest 
when Christ was about to be arrested; 
and his rushing into the sepulchre after 
the Resurrection, while his companion 
John, stopped at the entrance. It is 
true Peter acted the coward in denying 
Christ at the trial, but it was only a 
temporary weakness ; he went out and 
wept bitterly, and was soon forgiven. 
After the Resurrection it was to Peter 
alone that the angel sent a special mes- 
sage to meet Christ in Galilee, while 
only a general invitation was sent to 
the other disciples. Peter soon recov- 
ered his usual courage, and is found 
boldly and eloquently, near the very 
spot where the occurrences took place, 
and shortly after, charging the Jews 



44 Legal and Historical Proof 

with the death of Christ, and declaring 
His resurrection from the dead. 

Luke was a native of Antioch, a phy- 
sician, and, for a considerable period, 
a companion of the Apostle Paul. He 
wrote his Gospel about the year 63, ad- 
dressing it to Theophilus, a gentile of 
high rank in Greece, who had abjured 
paganism and embraced the Christian 
faith. He also wrote the Acts of the 
Apostles as clearly appears from the 
first verse of the opening chapter. He 
does not affirm himself to have been an 
eye-witness of the events narrated, al- 
though his personal knowledge may 
well be inferred from his statement 
that he "had perfect understanding of 
all things from the first." If he him- 
self was not an eye-witness, he certain- 
ly obtained his information from those 
who were. The report or narrative, 
however, concerned matters of great 
public moment, and was addressed to a 
high public official, and presumably un- 
dertaken at his request. Such a report 
would possess, according to Mr Green- 
leaf, every legal attribute of what law- 



Eesurrection of tlie Dead 45 

vers call an inquisition, and as such 
would be legally admissible in evidence 
in a court of justice. "Testimony of the 
Evangelists," 19. He must have been a 
man of liberal education, was an acute 
observer, and entirely competent to in- 
vestigate and report the miracles of 
Christ, involving, as many of them did, 
the cure of diverse diseases. It is nat- 
ural to expect, too, that, by reason of 
his professional training, he would re- 
cord circumstances connected with the 
healing of diseases and other matters 
with which a physician has to do, not 
mentioned by the others. Thus, he 
alone mentions the fact that the sleep 
of the disciples in Gethsemane was in- 
duced by extreme sorrow, and that the 
bloodlike sweat of Christ was occa- 
sioned by the intensity of agony; and 
he alone relates the miraculous heal- 
ing of Malchus' ear. And so the cir- 
cumstances attending the birth of 
John the Baptist, and the event and 
manner of the conception of Mary, the 
mother of Christ, are recorded fully by 
Luke alone, narratives intensely inter- 



46 Legal and Historical Proof 

esting and exceedingly well written. 
The world is indebted to Luke alone for 
the preservation of the Lord's Prayer, 
and the record of the repentance of the 
thief on the cross. 

John was the son of Zebedee, a fish- 
erman on the Sea of Galilee. He was 
the youngest of the Apostles, and was 
called to be an Apostle while fishing on 
the sea. He was an eye-witness to the 
works and miracles of Christ, and was 
called "the Disciple whom Jesus loved." 
He became one of the Chief Apostles 
and presided over seven churches in 
Asia Minor ; and having been banished 
to the Isle of Patmos, wrote Kevela- 
tions. On his release from exile, he re- 
turned to Ephesus, where, about the 
year 97, wrote his Gospel and Epistles, 
and died at the age of 100 years. It is 
stated on high authority that the sev- 
eral Books of the New Testament were 
first collected by John; that he ap- 
proved of the Gospels as written by 
Matthew, Mark and Luke, and added 
his own by way of supplement, omit- 
ting certain incidents which they had 



Kesurrection of tlie Dead 47 

given, and recording many which they 
had omitted. A comparison of the var- 
ious Books would make this theory ap- 
pear very reasonable. Many occur- 
rences related by Matthew, Mark and 
Luke are not mentioned by John; as 
examples, the Transfiguration on the 
Mount, and the raising of Jarius's 
daughter; while John alone tells of 
the resurrection of Lazarus, Peter's 
profession of faith, the discourse of 
Christ with the woman at the well, the 
healing of the infirm man at the Pool 
of Bethesda; and gives the comforting 
words of Christ as narrated in the 14th 
Chapter : "Let not your heart be trou- 
bled ; ye believe in God, believe also in 
Me." John, having established and 
governed a number of churches, must 
have been a man of considerable execu- 
tive ability ; and his writings, especial- 
ly his Book of Bevelations, indicate 
that he had attained a high degree of 
literary excellence. Home's Introduc- 
tion ; Paley's Evidences ; Greenleaf 's 
Testimony. 

These writings indicate that their 



48 Legal and Historical Proof 

authors were men of integrity and in- 
telligence, and, by reason of their call- 
ing, training and native ability, pecu- 
liarly fitted to observe and accurately 
narrate the important events occuring 
in their day. g 

Having shown the competency of the 
New Testament as evidence of the facts 
therein recited, this discussion might, 
at this point, properly close; for it is 
therein frequently and explicitly de- 
clared that the dead shall rise. But to 
realize the force of this evidence, some 
parts of it should be considered some- 
what in detail. Every statement there- 
in relating to this subject is founded 
upon the repeated declarations of 
Christ that the dead should rise. There 
can be no mistake as to His meaning. 
Nothing is left to interpretation. The 
Epistles of Paul, James, Peter and 
John declare the doctrine of the resur- 
rection, and they found it upon the de- 
clarations of Christ. It is true that 
the testimony of Christ is apparently 
of an unusual and startling nature; 
but it is easily believed when His char- 



Kesurrection of the Dead 49 

acter is considered, and in view of what 
He actually did. He had complete do- 
minion over life and death; He made 
the deaf to hear, and the dumb to 
speak; He made the blind to see, and 
He raised the dead to life. Those 
Christian writers whose works are now 
accessible, living nearest these wonder- 
ful events, were well satisfied that they 
took place. Quadratus, who wrote only 
70 years after the Ascension, was well 
persuaded, using these words: "The 
works of our Saviour were always con- 
spicuous, for they were real ; both they 
that were healed, and they that were 
raised from the dead, were seen, not 
only when they were healed or raised, 
but for a long time afterwards; not 
only whilst He dwelled on this earth, 
but also after His departure, and for 
a good while after it, insomuch as that 
some of them have reached to our 
times;" and so, a hundred years after 
the Ascension, Justin Martyrs, and 
one hundred and forty years after, Ire- 
naeus, and those following, were equal- 
ly confident that these events actually 



50 Legal and Historical Proof 

happened. The arguments of those 
who wrote against Christianity were 
answered by the Christian writers of 
that day from prophecy, wherein it was 
foretold that Christ should do these 
things. Thus Irenseus says: "But if 
they shall say that the Lord performed 
these things by an illusory appearance, 
leading these objectors to the prophe- 
cies, we will show from them, that all 
things were thus predicted concerning 
Him and strictly came to pass;" and 
so, Lactantius, who came a little later, 
pursued the same argument, wherein 
he says: "He performed miracles; we 
might have supposed Him to have been 
a magician, as ye say, and as the Jews 
then supposed, if all the prophets had 
not, with one spirit, foretold that Christ 
should perform these very things." 
Paley's Evidences, 389. That these 
were miracles is nothing against the 
truth of the statements. They were 
events of public observation and no- 
toriety. The blind, the deaf and dumb 
were known by their neighbors to be 
such ; that they were healed was equal- 



Kesurrection of the Dead 51 

ly known ; and Christ's agency in their 
healing was apparent to all. Lazarus 
was known by his friends and neighbors 
to be dead four days ; they knew where 
he was buried; were present at the 
grave ; assisted in removing the stone ; 
heard the command of Christ which 
was given in a loud voice ; saw Lazarus 
come forth from the grave; and, for a 
long time afterwards, associated with 
him. These were all matters of obser- 
vation, witnessed by many, and the 
truth could be know r n as readily and 
certainly as though they were of the 
ordinary affairs of life. They were the 
subjects of perception and reason, and 
that their importance was of the first 
magnitude should not have the effect 
of blinding the eye nor paralyzing the 
mind. This mighty spirit, flashed sud- 
denly upon the world like a newly cre- 
ated planet, of marvelous powers, who 
healed the incurable, brought the dead 
to life, and who was declared from the 
heavens to be the Son of God, He, it 
is, who declares the resurrection of the 
dead. It is natural to suppose and be- 



52 Legal and Historical Proof 

lieve that such a person, with a spirit 
keenly alive to the spiritual, might com- 
prehend future events and reveal the 
secrets of the spiritual world. 

He demonstrated His power of 
prophecy in a number of instances, es- 
pecially in His prophecy of the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem and of the Holy Tem- 
ple. He did not declare generally that 
they would be destroyed, but detailed 
at least a dozen circumstances attend- 
ing the destruction, and the signs and 
tokens which would precede that event ; 
he declared that, preceding the destruc^ 
tion, there would rise false prophets, 
would be wars and rumors of wars, na- 
tions would rise against nations, and 
kingdoms against kingdoms, there 
would be great earthquakes, fearful 
sights, and great signs in heaven. Fol- 
lowing these things Jerusalem would 
be compassed with armies, parents, 
kinsfolk and friends be arrayed against 
each other, that there would be famine 
and pestilence, that the inhabitants 
would fall by the edge of the sword, be 
led away captive, Jerusalem would be 



Resurrection of the Dead 53 

trodden down of the Gentiles, and that 
of the Holy Temple, not one stone would 
be left upon another. It is impressive 
to note how this prophecy accords with 
the facts of history. Josephus, in his 
History of the Jewish Wars, written 
a short time after the destruction of 
Jerusalem, which occurred thirt-seven 
years after the death of Christ, sol- 
emnly declares that, preceding the de- 
struction of Jerusalem, there were se- 
vere earthquakes in Judea; that many 
false prophets arose who were su- 
bourned by tyrants to deceive and in- 
jure the people ; that a star resembling 
a sword stood over the city, and that a 
comet continued above it a whole year ; 
that at the ninth hour of the night so 
great a light shone round the Altar and 
the Holy House that it appeared to be 
broad day, which light lasted for half 
an hour; that shortly after one of the 
feasts before sun setting, chariots and 
troops of soldiers in their armors were 
seen running about among the clouds 
and surrounding cities; that at one 
of the feasts of unleavened bread, a 



54 Legal and Historical Proof 

heifer, as she was led by the High 
Priest to be sacrificed, brought forth a 
lamb in the midst of the Temple, and 
that the Eastern Gate of the Inner 
Temple, which was of heavy brass and 
had been with difficulty shut by twenty 
men, and had bolts fastened very deep 
in a solid stone floor, was seen to be 
opened of its own accord about the 
sixth hour of the night. Josephus in- 
terprets these signs as foretelling the 
destruction of Jerusalem. He narrates 
how the city was compassed by the Bo- 
man armies under Titus; describes 
the famine and pestilence in the city; 
records how parents and children were 
arrayed against each other in an effort 
to secure bread ; describes the fury that 
seized upon the Jews, who destroyed 
each other, as well as the engines of 
war and the works necessary for their 
own protection, and even the food ne- 
cessary for their existence. One mil- 
lion, one hundred thousand perished 
with hunger and fell by the edge of the 
sword; ninety-seven thousand were led 
away captive; the city was completely 



Eesurrection of the Dead 55 

destroyed ; of the Temple, not one stone 
was left upon another, and even the 
place where it stood was torn up by the 
ploughshares of the hostile armies. 
Josephus, Vol. 4. 

The Transfiguration scene on the 
Mount is strongly corroborative of the 
declarations of Christ as to the Eesur- 
rection. Christ took Peter, James and 
John with Him up into the mountain 
to pray, and while there He "was trans- 
figured before them; and His face did 
shine as the sun, and His raiment was 
white as the light." Moses, who had 
been dead 1,500 years, and Elias, who 
had been dead 900 years, appeared and 
talked with Christ concerning His 
death. Matthew, Mark and Luke who 
record this event, were not at the Trans- 
figuration, although they doubtless re- 
ceived the information first hand from 
those who were; while John, who was 
present, makes no mention of the event 
in his Gospel. This is sufficiently ex- 
plained by the fact that John wrote 
his Gospel as a supplement to the other 
three Books, and, as they contained a 



56 Legal and Historical Proof 

full and satisfactory account of the 
event, it was not thought necessary 
for him to go into the matter. And 
moreover, Mark wrote his account of 
the transaction at the dictation of Peter 
who was present and Peter himself dis- 
tinctly refers to the scene in his Epis- 
tles. We have, therefore, the testimony 
of one witness who was present and saw 
the transaction, and it is uncontradict- 
ed. Luke states that the Apostles on 
this occasion "were heavy with sleep ;" 
but, to leave no doubt, he adds these 
significant words: "When they were 
awake they saw His glory, and the two 
men that stood with Him." It has often 
been said, even by Christians, in the 
face of this remarkable event, that none 
have ever returned from the spiritual 
world as proof of life beyond the grave. 
This concession is unwarranted. The 
statement is not true. Moses and Elias 
did appear, and this fact is as well at- 
tested as that Napoleon appeared in 
France from Elba, or any other impor- 
tant historical event. 
The strongest corroborative evidence 



Resurrection of the Dead 57 

as to the statements of Christ concern- 
ing the resurrection of the dead, if cor- 
roboration is needed, is found in His 
predictions concerning His own death 
and resurrection. His prophecy of 
these wonderful and happy events was 
fulfilled in every particular. He was 
not satisfied to prophesy in general 
terms, but gave a complete and detailed 
statement of the things that would take 
place. He declared that He would be 
betrayed by one of His own Disciples, 
naming him; that His Disciples, who 
had so often professed loyalty, would 
forsake Him; that Peter, especially, 
who was accounted the most courageous 
of all, would deny Him and act the cow- 
ard, stating almost the very hour ; that 
He would suffer at Jerusalem at the 
hands of the Chief Priests and Gentiles, 
the manner of His suffering being by 
mocking and crucifixion; that He 
would rise again the third day; that 
He would appear again to His Disci- 
ples after His resurrection, naming the 
place; and that He would ascend into 
Heaven. Every detail of this prophecy 



58 Legal and Historical Proof 

was fulfilled; the things that after- 
wards actually happened were in per- 
fect accord with every prediction, show- 
ing the absolute certainty and accuracy 
of His fore-knowledge. 

Christ knew whereof He spake, and 
did not fear to commit Himself upon so 
many details whereby the truth of His 
statements might be tested. Such a 
detailed statement furnishes all the 
advantages of cross examination, 
"which," Mr. Starkie observes, "is one 
of the principal tests which the law 
has devised for the ascertainment 
of truth." Starkie on Evidence, *page 
195. He did not declare His resur- 
rection to take place in the distant fu- 
ture when all who heard Him should be 
mouldered to dust ; it was to occur only 
within three days of His death. He 
desired that those who had trusted and 
followed Him should have immediate 
and convincing proof of His state- 
ments. If in three days there was no 
resurrection for Him, then His prophe- 
cy had failed, and His declarations as 
to the resurrection of others would be 



Kesurrection of the Dead 59 

entitled to little credence. Christ was 
willing to accept the conditions thus 
created, and rest proof of His divinity 
upon the result. If , therefore, the fail- 
ure of His prophecy in this regard 
could justly be regarded as an impeach- 
ment of His testimony in regard to the 
resurrection of others, then His own 
resurrection should be considered as 
corroborative of His testimony that the 
dead should rise. Paul so regarded it, 
for he declares in effect that the resur- 
rection of the dead is a necessary in- 
ference from the resurrection of Christ. 
"But if there be no resurrection of the 
dead," says Paul, "then is Christ not 
risen; and if Christ be not risen, then 
is our preaching in vain, and your faith 
is also vain. Yea, and we are found 
false witnesses of God; because we 
have testified of God that He raised up 
Christ; whom He raised not up, if so 
be that the dead rise not, For if the 
dead rise not, then is not Christ 
raised." His argument simply amounts 
to this : That the resurrection of Christ 
is an absolute certainty, beyond con- 



60 Legal and Historical Proof 

troversy, yet certain as it is, it is not 
true if the dead rise not. 
■ Since so much depends upon the cer- 
tainty of the resurrection of Christ, the 
only method ever devised to discredit it 
should be considered in detail. When 
Christ was crucified and buried, the 
chief priests and Pharisees affected to 
believe that the disciples would steal 
the body of Christ and thus give the im- 
pression that He had risen; and they 
procured a guard to be set over the sep- 
ulchre and sealed a stone at the en- 
trance. When, notwithstanding these 
precautions, Christ had risen, they 
bribed the guard to say that the body 
was stolen by His disciples while the 
guard slept. When taken from the 
cross, the body of Christ was laid in a 
tomb and wrapped in fine linen with 
about a hundred pounds of spices. This 
was on the evening of the day of the 
crucifixion. The next day the chief 
priests and Pharisees went to Pilate 
and asked him to make the sepulchre 
sure until the third day, lest the dis- 
ciples of Christ steal His body away at 



Kesurrection of the Dead 61 

night and say He was risen from the 
dead. "Pilate said unto them, ye have 
a watch ; go your way, make it as sure 
as you can. So they went and made the 
sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and 
setting a watch" ; and as they made the 
sepulchre sure, it may well be believed 
that the guard were first well satisfied 
that Christ was still in the tomb. This 
is admitted in the falsehood as to the 
theft, afterwards invented, in which it 
is alleged that the body was stolen after 
the guard had been set and while they 
were asleep. Upon the first day of the 
week, very early, Mary Magdalene and 
the other Mary came to the sepulchre, 
and were informed by an angel that 
Christ had risen, and they went at once 
and informed the disciples. While they 
were going some of the guard also went 
and "showed unto the chief priests all 
the things that were done," and the 
chief priests, after consulting with the 
elders, gave large money to the soldiers 
to say, "His disciples came by night, 
and stole Him away while we slept. So 
they took the money," it is recorded, 



62 Legal and Historical Proof 

"and did as they were taught." The 
chief priests did not believe that Christ 
would rise the third day, but suspected 
that His disciples would steal His body, 
and so give the impression that He had 
risen. They, therefore, provided against 
this contingency by setting at the tomb 
a guard of sixty soldiers, and sealing 
the stone at the entrance. The disci- 
ples doubtless knew of the precautions 
that had been taken to prevent the body 
from being stolen, and would not likely 
have made the attempt, even if they had 
been so inclined. 

When the guard left the sepulchre 
they "showed unto the chief priests all 
the things that were done" ; and, there- 
fore, must have told the chief priests 
that "there was a great earthquake; 
for the angel of the Lord descended 
from heaven and came and rolled back 
the stone from the door, and sat upon 
it. His countenance was like lightning 
and His raiment white as snow, and for 
fear of Him the keepers did shake and 
became as dead men." These things, at 
least, the guard did see before being 



Kesurrection of the Dead 63 

stricken, and tell to the chief priests; 
and, doubtless, they also heard the 
angel declare that Christ had risen; 
for though they had been paralyzed by 
the earthquake and the sight of the 
angel, it does not appear that they were 
in that condition when, shortly after, 
the angel told the women of the resur- 
rection; on the contrary, the inference 
is strong that they had fully recovered, 
for they started for the city about the 
same time as the women who imme- 
diately left the sepulchre when inform- 
ed by the angel that Christ had risen. 
While, therefore, the guard told the 
truth to the chief priests concerning 
the matter, the chief priests induced 
the guard to circulate a falsehood. 

The disciples evidently had no 
thought of stealing the body. They did 
not expect Christ to rise from the dead, 
and, of course, would not likely steal 
the body to create the impression that 
He had risen. Although Christ had, on 
several occasions, told them He would 
rise again the third day, they did not 
seem to comprehend His words; and 



64 Legal and Historical Proof 

when informed by the women of the 
empty tomb, "their words seemed to 
them as idle tales, and they believed 
them not." But Peter and John went 
at once to investigate, and found it as 
the women had reported. Even then, 
Peter wondered "in himself at that 
which was come to pass; for, as yet, 
they knew not the Scripture that He 
must rise again from the dead." His 
disciples believed only, when, after the 
resurrection, Christ had opened their 
understanding by showing, from the 
Scriptures, that "it behooved Christ to 
suffer and to rise from the dead the 
third day." Prior to this, they did not 
seem to understand that He was to rise 
the third day ; they certainly were sur- 
prised when they found that He had 
risen. These circumstances negative 
the thought that they would even con- 
template stealing the body to create the 
impression that He had risen. 

The condition of the tomb itself re- 
futes the story. When Peter entered 
the sepulchre, he found the linen clothes 
lying in order, and the napkin lying in 



Kesurrection of the Dead 65 

another place, carefully wrapped to- 
gether. Gregory of Nyssen, writing 
1500 years ago, commenting on these 
facts, says "that the disposition of the 
clothes in the sepulchre, the napkin 
that was about our Saviour's head, not 
lying with the linen clothes, but wrap- 
ped together in a place by itself, did not 
bespeak the terror and hurry of thieves, 
and, therefore, refutes the story of the 
body being stolen." Paley's Evidences, 
147. Simon Greenleaf expresses the 
same thought more fully by saying: 
"The grave clothes lying orderly in 
their place, and the napkin folded to- 
gether by itself, made it evident that 
the sepulchre had not been rifled nor 
the body stolen by violent hands; for 
these garments and spices would have 
been of more value to thieves than 
merely a naked corpse; at least, they 
would not have taken the trouble thus 
to fold them together. The same cir- 
cumstances showed also that the body 
had not been removed by friends; for 
they would not thus have left the grave 
clothes behind. All these considera- 



66 Legal and Historical Proof 

tions produced in the mind the belief 
that Jesus had risen from the dead." 
Testimony of the Evangelists, 542. 

While this story was afterwards 
commonly reported among the Jews, 
yet, as Dr. Gilmore observes, "not once 
is it adverted to on those trials of the 
Apostles which soon took place at Jeru- 
salem, on account of their bold and 
open proclamation of their Master's 
resurrection. Though the Apostles 
were cited before that very body who 
had given currency to the report of the 
disciples' theft, they are not even once 
taxed with the crime ; not even a whis- 
per escapes the lips of the Sanhedrin 
on the subject" ; and the story was soon 
abandoned by those in authority as un- 
tenable and absurd. 

Notwithstanding these attempts to 
discredit it, Christ was indeed risen 
from the dead. He was afterwards seen 
by many; by day and by night; at a 
distance and near; and a number of 
times. They touched Him; conversed 
with Him; ate with Him; and exam- 
ined His body. He showed Himself 



Eesurrection of the Dead 67 

alive to His Apostles "after His pas- 
sion, by many infallible proofs, being 
seen of them forty days, and speaking 
of the things pertaining to the kingdom 
of God"; and "was seen of above five 
hundred brethren at once." Dr. Ly- 
man Abbott declares that "no event in 
the world's history is better attested 
than is the resurrection of Jesus." 

When the time came for His depar- 
ture, "He led His disciples out as far 
as to Bethany; and He lifted up His 
hands and blessed them, and it came to 
pass while He blessed them, He was 
parted from them, and carried up into 
heaven." An important, possibly the 
most important, fact in connection with 
the resurrection is that relating to the 
ascension of Christ. The time, place 
and manner of His ascension, and the 
number of witnesses thereto, leave no 
doubt as to its reality. Christ seems 
to have been determined that there 
should be no room for controversy or 
cavil as to His destination. The ascen- 
sion was in a mountain where the view 
was unobstructed and where He could 



68 Legal and Historical Proof 

be more distinctly and for the most 
considerable space beheld. It was in 
broad daylight, when all were alert and 
fully awake. It was in view of the dis- 
ciples, while they were assembled to- 
gether, and while He was near them 
and conversing with them. It was pub- 
lic, gentle and by degrees, so that His 
disciples steadily followed Him until 
He was lost from view. "They looked 
steadfastly toward heaven as He went 
up." He was taken from them "whilst 
they beheld Him," and when He had 
disappeared, two angels announced 
that He had been taken up into heaven, 
and would, at the last day, "so come in 
like manner as ye have seen Him go 
into heaven." Shortly before His as- 
cension, Christ promised His disciples 
that in a few days the Holy Ghost 
should come upon them, and directed 
them to remain at Jerusalem. On the 
day of Pentecost, shortly after, at Jeru- 
salem, "suddenly there came a sound 
from heaven as of a rushing mighty 
wind, and they were all filled with the 
Holy Ghost." If a friend, leaving for 



Resurrection of the Dead 69 

London, should promise to write you 
to Philadelphia, upon his arrival at his 
destination, and should state in ad- 
vance the contents of the letter, and 
you should receive, in due time, a let- 
ter purporting to come from London 
with his signature and with the same 
contents, you would be justified in say- 
ing that the letter was from your 
friend, and that he had arrived at Lon- 
don. Such evidence is resorted to in a 
court of law. Wigmore on Evidence, 
Vol. 3, Section 2153. The narrative 
concerning the ascension of Christ con- 
tains every essential in the illustration 
given. These facts justified the disci- 
ples in believing that Christ had as- 
cended to heaven, and bring home to us 
a realization of the absolute certainty 
and reality of His ascension. And this 
is not all. There is strong corrobora- 
tive evidence as to the ascension. We 
have the direct and positive evidence of 
Paul. Who doubts his testimony when 
he declares that, while journeying on 
the road to Damascus, he saw Christ. 
Paul, a man of commanding intellectual 



70 Legal and Historical Proof 

powers, trained to habits of reflection 
and investigation, not easily imposed 
upon, and, at tlie time, hostile to the 
person of Christ, would not bear testi- 
mony to the scene if it had not actually 
taken place. 

In conclusion : Paul could well ask 
the question, in addressing his follow- 
ers, some of whom probably doubted, 
"Why then should it be thought a thing 
incredible with you that God should 
raise the dead?" Hear the voice of au- 
thority: "I am the Kesurrection and 
the Life; he that believeth in Me, 
though he were dead, yet shall he live ; 
and whosoever liveth and believeth in 
Me, shall never die. Believest thou 
this?" 















^v 

#' % 























V-:^J% -, ^; 































c *\*«« 



















V 



^ 



^> * '. i 



• 






%V 






v\ 






4 ^ V 



. *-^ 












-•: 



'*A v* 






















> 







^ 













"°-Z- * » - ° 






: %# ^ 






^ "5 






o , , - A 



A& 



<*,. ^ 






\ ^ 






#' 



"',■"-■■■■"■..';,'• 



"W 































> 












.v><^ 












** 



t 0o 



a i \ 









^ 



^ 






- - 
































cT> \v x 



^"% 



